Ethics in a Violent World (2005-2006)

Focusing on the institutions regulating war and peace, this initiative engages scholars, policymakers, and concerned citizens through major public lectures, policy briefings, and journal articles.
Learn More »

Launched in December 2005, the Ethics in a Violent World initiative aims
to engage scholars, policymakers, and concerned citizens in debate about the
ethical background and choices that always inform the international institutions
regulating war and peace. This year, our focus is on three institutions of
intense public concern:

UN Reform and Collective Security

The establishment of the International Criminal Court

U.S. judiciary's relationship to international law and its enforcement

In the 2004 presidential election, American voters consistently cited
"values" as among the most important factors in their political decision-making.
The "values" debate lacked, however, an important international dimension, as it
tended to focus on issues of private morality. The Ethics in a Violent
World initiative seeks to extend citizens' deep-seated and pervasive concern
for values to an understanding of American foreign policy. This can be done
through clarifying and strengthening the public's intuitive sentiment that
international institutions can be a force for the public good, both at home and
abroad. Not only do 62 percent of Americans favor participation in the United
Nations, but 69 percent believe, more specifically, that the UN brings
legitimacy to the use of military force.1 58 percent of Americans want the United States to
support the International Criminal Court (ICC).2 And, on the issue of torture, 88 percent of Americans
favor having international laws govern how a country must treat an individual it
has detained in a time of war.3

Yet this general support for international institutions that govern violent
conflict has not translated into policy action. The United States has recently
launched a war in defiance of the Security Council and has appointed an
ambassador to the UN who has consistently criticized that institution; it
rejects recognition of the ICC; and the dominant thinking of U.S. judges is that
international law is not enforceable in U.S. courts, even when the United States
has agreed to abide by that law.

The Ethics in a Violent World initiative highlights the competing
moral priorities at work in the design and interpretation of international
institutions that regulate conflict—and it encourages citizens and policymakers
to believe that they can contribute to positive change through supporting these
institutions, however critically.